Similar Posts
![Requirements Loops: Definition & Purpose](https://ivanjureta.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Bertini_fresco_of_Galileo_Galilei_and_Doge_of_Venice.jpg)
Requirements Loops: Definition & Purpose
A “Requirements Loop” is an evidence-supported explanation of How observed events in an environment have led or are leading to the creation and persistence of those requirements, How to change the environment in order to satisfy the requirements in the future, and How to measure the change in the environment, in order to evaluate the…
Preconditions for a Market for High Quality AI Training Data
There is no high quality AI without high quality training data. A large language model (LLM) AI system, for example, may seem to deliver accurate and relevant information, but verifying that may be very hard – hence the effort into explainable AI, among others. If I wanted accurate and relevant legal advice, how much risk…
![Building University Spin-Offs from Research on Decision-Making](https://ivanjureta.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Capture2-768x461.png)
Building University Spin-Offs from Research on Decision-Making
This short interview on my research on decision making and use of it in companies, was done in 2018 with fnrs.tv, part of the Belgian Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique – FNRS, in Brussels. Each of my first two academic books led to the founding of a spin-off; see the books here.
![Machine/AI as Inventor? Notes on Thaler v. USPTO](https://ivanjureta.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/1A-oil-enamel-canvas-Jackson-Pollock-Museum-1948-768x500.jpg)
Machine/AI as Inventor? Notes on Thaler v. USPTO
Can “an artificial intelligence machine be an ‘inventor’ under the Patent Act”? According to the Memorandum Opinion filed on September 2, 2021, in the case 1:20-cv-00903, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) requires that the inventor is one or more people [1]. An “AI machine” cannot be named an inventor on a patent that…